Darrell was a friend of mine a long time ago. He replaced
me in the sales position I was in as I moved over to another part of the
company. I trained him for a couple of months and then went on to be a salesman
in another division. Our friendship grew from there. Eventually I became his
boss as I became sales manager over both divisions. Because
we had this friendship, Darrell always felt free to speak frankly with me. It
never hurt our relationship because I trusted him and he trusted me. One
of the things that Darrell would say to me whenever I would throw numbers
around, and I was quite good at throwing numbers around, was "figures lie and liars
figure". I only offer up this story because I want the spirit in which I
share these figures to be clear. I'm friends with some of the people I'm going
to call to question. And I'm also adept at making figure say whatever I want to
make them say. I hope our friendship is intact when I'm finished. I'm not
attacking, I'm simply asking.
In my previous blog post I made it clear that it is my belief that Camping and Retreat Ministries (CRM) is an extension of the conference. If the conference mission is to "lead congregations to lead people to active faith in Jesus Christ" then it follows that CRM is called to do that through camping and retreats.
When I was on the Board, one of my frustrations with the way CRM effectiveness was measured was the constant focus on summer camp ministry. We were always being asked, "How many kids went to summer camp." It seems we kept forgetting that we were Camping AND Retreat ministries. Retreats were an important part of what we did. We asked the site directors to spend a lot of time seeking to fill camps; not just eight weeks in the summer but 52 weeks a year. It seems almost every weekend those camps were occupied. When it comes to measuring the effectiveness of a Camping and Retreat ministry, using summer camps as the litmus test for the effectiveness of a ministry is akin to using only worship attendance to discern the health of a church. What about small groups, professions of faith, dollars to mission... apportionment payout? Each of these is important.
In 2009 there were nearly 10,000 United Methodists who used our camps. They came from 300 churches. That means that about 35% of our churches were served. The "2000 kids in summer camp attendance / 20% of churches" measurement used as justification for the action recently taken is an unfortunate measurement that falls far short of the actual use of the four sites.
In 2011, the last year I have numbers, 283
churches participated in Summer Camps. That is roughly 33% of the total
churches in our conference. Apparently 2014 only had 20% of our churches
represented. When the board managed the Executive Director of CRM we were clear that large
part of his job was promoting camps to churches that were not availing themselves of our ministry. I suspect that the void left by the absence of anyone in that role led to this decrease. What I'm saying is, CRM is being held responsible for a measurement it didn't take responsibility to maintain. That responsibility came under the auspices of the Annual Conference Office the day they took the Executive Director job under their management (see my previous post) Who do we hold accountable for that lapse in diligence?
One more statistic that can't be ignored is that in 2009 there were 422 "young adults" who had a leadership role as volunteers and employees in our summer camp ministry. Summer camp has been an excellent training ground as young adults have been able to experience leadership in this "incubator" type setting. Since we have put such a strong emphasis on our next generations, we've hired a Catalyst to engage next generations, and CRM has adopted a mission statement that focuses on next generations, what leadership training opportunities will engage such a large number of young adults?
Moving forward, I think it would be wise to share with the Annual Conference membership the measurement by which this ministry is going to be held accountable. As I believe we should be more about the number of churches than the number of participants (refer again to the conference mission statement) what is the goal for participation? Who will be responsible for achievement of this projected goal? Who will be held accountable?
While I'm on the subject of accountability; as I read the Annual Conference budget for CRM for 2015 it shows $522,000, an increase of $29,000. $245,000 of those funds are designated for Site Directors Support (Line 172) and $50,000 for Camp Improvements (line 177). Can I assume that those line items will go unspent in 2015? If so, will the conference budget be reduced by nearly $300,000 and apportioned appropriately? The Annual Conference membership voted on a budget with certain assumptions. If those assumptions are not to be fulfilled, I think it unreasonable to expect that those funds could be spent in a different direction without the approval of the membership. Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe the Mission Council has authority to make these mid-year adjustments without seeking the will of the membership of the Conference. Can someone provide clarification?
Another detail that is related has to do with a property issue. The Executive Director of CRM was provided with a parsonage. That property was owned by CRM and not the Annual Conference Board of Trustees. With no Executive Director, was that parsonage sold? If so, what was the disposition of that asset? According to Article IX of the bylaws of Missouri United Methodist Camping and Retreat Ministries, the activities of the board should not contradict with the Book of Discipline. Per Discipline a local church can only use the proceeds of the sale of a physical asset for either capital improvements or for debt reduction. General operations is not one of the options. CRM has no indebtedness, so what was improved with those assets? I'm only asking because, at a time when questions are coming from several uninformed directions, full transparency is vital.
13 comments:
I pray we get answers to questions like these. I have my doubts, and have lost all faith and trust with those deciders, as to if there is anyone there with the courage to step forward and be accountable.
-Camp Manager
Also according to doctrine/discipline, doesn't it take a vote of members to sell a property?
1. "Leading congregations to lead people..." Notice that it doesn't say "Leading United Methodist congregations to lead United Methodist people..." How many non-UMC congregations have been blessed by our camps?
2. When it comes to metrics, do we measure people "reached" or people missed?
3. At one time, 1/3 of the female student body at Columbia University were married to faculty members. Sounds astounding until we get some more information: there were only 3 female students at the time!
Jamie, I'm not sure the answer to your property question. I was confident that the answer was "yes" they need a vote of the Annual Conference Membership. After reading the BOD, I'm not so sure. We're going to need a legal mind to read that.
Clayton, When I was on the board we celebrated when outside groups used our facilities. The outside cash flow was important to our success. However, serving non-UMC's shouldn't be the focus of a UMC conference funded by apportionments from UMC churches. I agree, though, there needs to be some clear definitions to the metrics that will be used in the future. That shoudl be the case for all of our conference ministries and the AC membership should hold the staff responsible for reporting on those published metrics.
Clayton, you crack me up! I miss that humor.
Thank you for providing numbers other than those in the conference's news release. I also am very aware numbers, even true, factual numbers, can be used to say whatever a person wants said. Sort of like using a Bible passage out of context, isn't it?
agestciThank you, David, for this long- anticipated blog and its facts, figures, and thoughts to ponder. Jerry has been sharing with those who will listen some of those exact facts and figures. While change is inevitable and often needed, so is listening to those who have gone before and encountered some of the same troubled waters.
I would have to agree with Clayton. I feel my job is to make disciples for Jesus Christ, not make disciples for the UMC. This in no way makes the UMC less important in my life, but I feel ALL christian denominations should be making disciples. While the UMC doctrine works for me it may not work for someone else, but that does not make them any less of a christian. While I too would like to see camp and retreat ministry bring more people to the UMC, if one of my kids (biological or adopted through church) has a friend from another denomination or unchurched who does not have an opportunity to strengthen their faith development through a program the UMC (local or conference) can offer I am going to offer the program to them. I tell other parents about the wonderful programs MY church has to offer because I believe in those programs and have seen changes in my personal children's lives and want to share the wealth. Just the other day after I lead my daughter's girl scout troop in earning their religious pin, I invited all of the girls to come and join our church's new middle school girls small group, not with the intention of gaining members for my church, but because I believe in a program I helped develop and lead. If we gain new members that to me is a bonus to the ministry we have given to these kids.
I agree with you, Melissa. I think what you're saying is we do the right thing not with the intention of swelling our ranks as United Methodists but with the greater purpose of bringing people to Christ.
I have felt, since the Health Church Initiative, that we've been more data-driven -- got to prove with numbers that we're fantastic Christians. It's not unlike the numbers push in public schools, where schools are judged on the scores students achieve on ever-changing standardized tests, not on whether kids are really being taught to think critically.
So it's probably some kind of cosmic societal shift that's driving all this. But I digress...sorry.
My personal view on this matter is that it is more serious than some seem to realize and may result in more damage than even the loss of the camps.
I do not pretend to know whether the decision handed down by Bishop Schnase will eventually result in more good than evil. I do know that the process by which it came about was not Christ-like.
Whether intentional or not, the camps have been largely ignored and repressed for some years now. Adequate funding was denied by the Conference through budget cuts. Political manipulation denied the camps adequate staff. The Conference made little effort to promote the camps among the churches and laity. The Conference made no fundraising efforts among the churches and laity while direct fundraising by the camps was discouraged. Finally, the Conference studied this understandably "troubled program" and decided that it was not worth saving.
The most troubling aspect of this process occurred when Bishop Schnase decided to act on this study by dictating his decision to the churches and laity in a Vatican like manner. No one bothered to ask, "What do YOU think?".
This troubles me greatly. If the United Methodist Church has come to this, then we may as well rejoin our Catholic brethren with whom we parted ways centuries ago, in large part to avoid such procedures. This situation needs to be rectified, and soon. It is more dangerous to the Church than any unfortunate incident in my memory.
May God help each of us to see His will in our daily actions and guide us in the way of Christ.
Bruce Blair
Dave, thanks for your wise insights and for your time.
Pastor Dave - Thank you for the time and effort you are offering to inform and invite dialogue. The decision made, the process to get there, and the communication of the decision is very disconcerting. Thank you for including insight that the camps and retreat centers are year-round resources for ministry and outreach with people of all ages. - Judy Chaney Slimmer
Post a Comment